Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan Requires a Strategic Environmental Assessment Or a Habitats Regulations Assessment

This screening report is an assessment of whether the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan requires a Strategic Environmental Assessment or a Habitats Regulations Assessment

Strategic Environmental Assessment and Habitats Regulations Assessment Screening

Revised Version (1st November 2019)

Bassetlaw District Council

1 Contents 1. Introduction ...... 1 The Purpose of this Report ...... 1 2. The Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan ...... 2 Name of Qualifying Body and Local Planning Authority ...... 2 Location and spatial extent of the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan ...... 2 Timeframe of the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan ...... 2 Main aims of the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan ...... 3 Relationship with the Bassetlaw Local Plan ...... 3 Does the Walkeringham Parish Neighbourhood Plan propose allocations? ...... 3 3. Legislative Background ...... 5 Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) ...... 5 Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) ...... 5 Recent Case Law ...... 5 4. SEA Screening ...... 7 When is SEA Required? ...... 7 Assessment ...... 8 5. HRA Screening ...... 10 The requirement to undertake HRA ...... 10 Identification of European sites which may be affected by the Neighbourhood Plan ...... 10 Humber Estuary SAC, SPA and Ramsar ...... 12 Possible Sherwood Forest pSPA ...... 12 Ecological attributes of the European sites ...... 12 Assessment of ‘likely significant effects’ of the Neighbourhood Plan ...... 12 Interpretation of ‘likely significant effect’ ...... 13 Assessment ...... 13 Physical damage/loss of habitat ...... 14 Non-physical disturbance (noise, vibration and light) ...... 14 Air pollution ...... 14 Impacts of recreation ...... 15 Cat predation ...... 16 Water quantity and quality ...... 16 Identification of other plans and projects which may have ‘incombination’ effects ...... 16 6. Conclusions ...... 17 Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) ...... 17

Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) ...... 17 Consultation ...... 17 Overall ...... 18 Appendix 1: Assessment of potential environmental effects ...... 19 Appendix 2: Ecological attributes of the European sites ...... 29 Appendix 3: HRA Screening Matrix ...... 31 Appendix 4: Annex I and Annex II Projects, EIA Directive ...... 39 Annex I Projects, EIA Directive ...... 39 Annex II Projects, EIA Directive ...... 40 Appendix 5: Consultation Responses ...... 43

iii

1. Introduction The Purpose of this Report 1.1 This screening report is an assessment of whether the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan requires a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) in accordance with the European Directive 2001/42/ EC and associated Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes Regulations. A SEA is required if the Neighbourhood Plan is likely to have a significant effect on the environment.

1.2 This report will also screen to determine whether the Neighbourhood Plan requires a Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) in accordance with Article 6(3) and (4) of the EU Habitats Directive and with Regulation 63 of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017. A HRA is required when it is deemed that likely adverse significant effects may occur on protected Habitats (Natura 2000) sites, as a result of the implementation of a plan or project.

1.3 This report is an updated version of that initially issued in Spring 2019. The revisions reflect changes that have been made to the emerging Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan subsequent to the regulation 14 consultation (22nd February to 18th April 2019). Amendments to Policy 6 have seen the removal of the specific allocation of the former Walkeringham Brickworks site and incorporation of added protections into the policy wording. These changes have impacted upon the assessment for SEA Topics Biodiversity, flora and fauna and Cultural Heritage (see Appendix 1 of this report). Amendments to the site allocations have also been made, with the effect of reducing the number of allocated sites from 12 to 9. Although this reduces the anticipated numbers of dwellings to be delivered on allocated sites, the overall number of dwellings expected to be delivered by the plan remains the same at 70. The only changes made in this report on this matter are in respect to policy numbers and names, with no changes expected in respect to impact.

1.4 The Draft Screening Report was sent to the environmental bodies (Historic England, the Environment Agency and Natural England) for their consideration. All three bodies have made comments (Appendix 5) and this final version of the Screening Report incorporates their views.

2. The Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan Name of Qualifying Body and Local Planning Authority 2.1 The qualifying body preparing the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan is Walkeringham Parish Council. The Local Planning Authority is Bassetlaw District Council. Location and spatial extent of the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan 2.2 The Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan covers the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Area, comprising the parish of Walkeringham in Nottinghamshire.

2.3 Walkeringham Parish is in north Nottinghamshire, in the north-eastern part of Bassetlaw District. The Parish has an area of 1,210.76 hectares and the village of Walkeringham is located at the centre of the Parish between two roads, the A161 and B1403. The village lies about 3.26 miles (5.25km) north-west of Gainsborough.

2.4 Main access to the village is along the A161 which runs north-south and connects Walkeringham with Misterton to the north and with Beckingham to the south-east. The B1403 runs into the village from the west connecting the village with Misterton and Gringley on the Hill to the south-west. Walkeringham offers a limited range of services and facilities: a village hall, pub and a primary school. Timeframe of the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan 2.5 To 2035.

Main aims of the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan 2.6 The vision of the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan is as follows:

• Walkeringham will retain its quiet, rural character throughout the period up to 2035. • Future building should be consistent with this and comprise only small developments in keeping with their surroundings and close to the supporting infrastructure. • The built and natural heritage of the Parish will be retained and protected. • The most highly valued countryside in the Parish will be conserved. • Job opportunities within the village we have been encouraged to provide improved prospects for local people. • The sense of community spirit and cohesion will be fostered and increased. Relationship with the Bassetlaw Local Plan 2.7 Only a draft neighbourhood plan that meets each of a set of basic conditions can be put to a referendum and be made. One of these basic conditions requires the making of the neighbourhood plan to be in general conformity with the strategic policies contained in the development plan for the area.

2.8 For the purposes of the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan, the relevant part of the Local Plan (formerly Local Development Framework) is the Bassetlaw Core Strategy and Development Management Policies Development Plan Document (DPD).

2.9 The Core Strategy and Development Management Policies DPD was adopted in December 2011. It sets out a vision for change in Bassetlaw to 2028, along with the place-specific policy approaches to be taken in order to achieve this vision. A small number of more detailed development management policies on key issues that will need to be addressed when delivering new development, are also included.

2.10 Walkeringham is identified as a Rural Service Centre- a settlement that offers a range of services and facilities, and access to public transport, that makes it a suitable location for limited rural growth. A parallel process of Sustainability Appraisal (SA) was undertaken alongside the plan-making process for the Core Strategy and Development Management Policies DPD.

2.11 Given the importance of having an up-to-date local plan, Bassetlaw District Council is currently in the process of preparing the Bassetlaw Local Plan which will include strategic policies for the period 2018 to 2035. Consultation on the Draft Local Plan commenced on 14 January 2019 and ended on 10 March 2019 in accordance with Regulation 18 of the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) 2012. Upon adoption, the Bassetlaw Local Plan will replace the 2011 Core Strategy and Development Management Policies DPD. A Sustainability Appraisal Report has been prepared as part of the integrated SA and SEA of the Draft Bassetlaw Local Plan. Habitats Regulations Assessment screening of the Draft Bassetlaw Local Plan has also been undertaken. Does the Walkeringham Parish Neighbourhood Plan propose allocations? 2.12 A neighbourhood plan can allocate sites for development, including housing. Where they do contain policies relevant to housing supply, these policies should take account of latest and up-to-date evidence of housing need.

2.13 The strategic policies of the Draft Bassetlaw Local Plan have been informed by an up-to- date local housing need assessment, conducted using the standard method in national planning guidance. Rural settlements will accommodate a minimum of 1,777 new dwellings and deliver the necessary associated infrastructure from 2018 to 2035. This will be delivered through existing planning permissions and sites allocated through the Neighbourhood Plan process and Local Plan site allocation process. Where neighbourhood plan groups choose to take forward a neighbourhood plan, the Draft Local Plan sets out the housing requirement to be met.

2.14 For the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Area, the housing requirement 2018 to 2035 is 48 dwellings, representing a 10% increase in the number of dwellings in the settlement as at August 2018. Growth is capped at 70 dwellings- 20% of existing dwellings in the settlement.

2.15 The Draft Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan allocates 9 specific housing sites for development with a cumulative site capacity of 66 dwellings, with the potential for additional infill sites to come forward as windfall development.

3. Legislative Background 3.1 A neighbourhood plan or order must be compatible with European Union obligations, as incorporated into UK law, in order to be legally compliant. This assessment concerns two European Union directives: Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) 3.2 The Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive is a European Union requirement that seeks to provide a high level of protection of the environment by integrating environmental considerations into the process of preparing certain plans and programmes.

3.3 The aim of the Directive is “to contribute to the integration of environmental considerations into the preparation and adoption of plans and programmes with a view to promoting sustainable development, by ensuing that, in accordance with this Directive, an environmental assessment is carried out of certain plans and programmes which are likely to have significant effects on the environment.” Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) 3.4 Under the provisions of the EU Habitats Directive and translated into English law by the Habitats Regulations (The Conservation of Habitats and Species (Amendment) Regulations 2012), a competent authority must carry out an assessment of whether a plan or project will significantly affect the integrity of any European Site, in terms of impacting the site’s conservation objectives. HRA is the assessment of the impacts of a land use proposal against the conservation objectives of Habitats (Natura 2000) sites. Specifically, it is to ascertain whether or not a proposal (either alone or in combination with other proposals) would potentially damage the internationally designated features of that site. Recent Case Law 3.5 The ‘People over Wind, Peter Sweetman v Coillte Teoranta’ (12 April 2018) judgement ruled that Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive should be interpreted as meaning that mitigation measures should be assessed as part of an Appropriate Assessment, and should not be taken into account at the screening stage. The precise wording of the ruling is as follows:

Article 6(3) ………must be interpreted as meaning that, in order to determine whether it is necessary to carry out, subsequently, an appropriate assessment of the implications, for a site concerned, of a plan or project, it is not appropriate, at the screening stage, to take account of measures intended to avoid or reduce the harmful effects of the plan or project on that site.

3.6 In light of the above, the HRA screening stage has not relied upon avoidance or mitigation measures to draw conclusions as to whether the Neighbourhood Plan would result in likely significant effects.

3.7 The ‘Holohan v An Bord Pleanala’ (9 Nov 2018) CJEU judgement states:

Article 6(3) of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora must be interpreted as meaning that an ‘appropriate assessment’ must, on the one hand, catalogue the entirety of habitat types and species for which a site is protected, and, on the other, identify and examine both the implications of the proposed project for the species present on that site, and for which that site has not

5 been listed, and the implications for habitat types and species to be found outside the boundaries of that site, provided that those implications are liable to affect the conservation objectives of the site.

Article 6(3) of Directive 92/43 must be interpreted as meaning that the competent authority is permitted to grant to a plan or project consent which leaves the developer free to determine subsequently certain parameters relating to the construction phase, such as the location of the construction compound and haul routes, only if that authority is certain that the development consent granted establishes conditions that are strict enough to guarantee that those parameters will not adversely affect the integrity of the site.

Article 6(3) of Directive 92/43 must be interpreted as meaning that, where the competent authority rejects the findings in a scientific expert opinion recommending that additional information be obtained, the ‘appropriate assessment’ must include an explicit and detailed statement of reasons capable of dispelling all reasonable scientific doubt concerning the effects of the work envisaged on the site concerned.

4. SEA Screening When is SEA Required? 4.1 Planning Practice Guidance – Strategic environmental assessment requirements for neighbourhood plans (Paragraph: 026 Reference ID: 11-026-20140306) states that,

‘In some limited circumstances, where a neighbourhood plan is likely to have significant environmental effects, it may require a strategic environmental assessment. Draft neighbourhood plan proposals should be assessed to determine whether the plan is likely to have significant environmental effects. This process is commonly referred to as a “screening” assessment and the requirements are set out in regulation 9 of the Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes Regulations 2004.

If likely significant environmental effects are identified, an environmental report must be prepared in accordance with paragraphs (2) and (3) of regulation 12 of those Regulations.

One of the basic conditions that will be tested by the independent examiner is whether the making of the neighbourhood plan is compatible with European Union obligations (including under the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive).

To decide whether a draft neighbourhood plan might have significant environmental effects, it must be assessed (screened) at an early stage of the plan’s preparation according to the requirements set out in regulation 9 of the Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes Regulations 2004. These include a requirement to consult the environmental assessment consultation bodies.

Each consultation body will be able to advise on particular topics relevant to its specific area of expertise and responsibility, and the specific information that it holds.

Where it is determined that the plan is unlikely to have significant environmental effects (and, accordingly, does not require an environmental assessment), a statement of reasons for the determination should be prepared. A copy of the statement must be submitted with the neighbourhood plan proposal and made available to the independent examiner.’

Assessment 4.2 This diagram shows the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive’s field of application in the form of a diagram. The original diagram is from ‘A Practical Guide to the Strategic Environmental Objective’. The red arrows indicate the process route for the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan SEA Screening Assessment.

4.3 The table below shows the assessment of whether the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan will require a full SEA. The questions below are drawn from the diagram above which sets out how the SEA Directive should be applied. Stage Yes/No Reason 1. Is the Neighbourhood Plan Yes The preparation of and adoption of subject to preparation and/or the Walkeringham Neighbourhood adoption by a national, regional or Plan is allowed under The Town and local authority OR prepared by an Country Planning Act 1990 as authority for adoption through a amended by the Localism Act

Stage Yes/No Reason legislative procedure by 2011.The Walkeringham Parliament or Government? (Art. Neighbourhood Plan will be prepared 2(a)) by Walkeringham Parish Council (as the ’relevant body’) and will be ‘made’ by Bassetlaw Council as the local authority. 2. Is the Neighbourhood Plan Yes Whilst the Walkeringham required by legislative, regulatory Neighbourhood Plan is not a or administrative provisions? (Art. requirement and is optional under the 2(a)) provisions of The Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by the Localism Act 2011, it will if ‘made’, form part of the Development Plan for the District. It is therefore important that the screening process considers whether it is likely to have significant environmental effects and hence whether SEA is required under the Directive. 3. Is the Neighbourhood Plan Yes The Walkeringham Neighbourhood prepared for agriculture, forestry, Plan covers a range of land use issues fisheries, energy, industry, and allocations. Although the transport, waste management, Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan is water management, a non-strategic scale document, telecommunications, tourism, focused solely upon the Parish of town and country planning or land Walkeringham, it can set the use, AND does it set a framework framework for future development for future development consent of consent of some of the projects in projects in Annexes I and II (see Annexes I and II to the EIA Directive Appendix 4) to the EIA Directive? (see Appendix 4 for list). (Art 3.2(a)) 5. Does the Neighbourhood Plan Yes Determination of small sites at local determine the use of small areas level only. at local level, OR is it a minor modification of a PP subject to Art. 3.2? (Art. 3.3) 8. Is it likely to have a significant Yes Appendix 1 presents the effect on the environment? (Art. environmental effects which have the 3.5) potential to arise as a result of the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan.

5. HRA Screening The requirement to undertake HRA 5.1 The requirement to undertake HRA of development plans was confirmed by the amendments to the Habitats Regulations published for England and Wales in July 2007 and updated in 2010 and again in 2012. These updates were consolidated into the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017.

5.2 The HRA refers to the assessment of the potential effects of a development plan on one or more European Sites, including Special Protection Areas (SPAs) and Special Areas of Conservation (SACs):

. SPAs are classified under the European Council Directive “on the conservation of wild birds‟ (79/409/EEC; ‘Birds Directive’) for the protection of wild birds and their habitats (including particularly rare and vulnerable species listed in Annex 1 of the Birds Directive, and migratory species); . SACs are designated under the Habitats Directive and target particular habitats (Annex 1) and/or species (Annex II) identified as being of European importance.

5.3 The National Planning Policy Framework (paragraph 176) also expects potential SPAs (pSPAs), possible SACs (pSACs) and Ramsar sites to be included within the assessment.

. Ramsar sites support internationally important wetland habitats and are listed under the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar Convention, 1971).

5.4 Candidate SACs (cSACs) and Sites of Community Importance (SCIs), which are sites that have been adopted by the European Commission but not yet formally designated by the government, should also be considered.

5.5 For ease of reference during HRA, these designations are collectively referred to as European sites, despite Ramsar designations being at the wider, international level. Identification of European sites which may be affected by the Neighbourhood Plan 5.6 In order to initiate the search of European sites that could potentially be affected by a neighbourhood plan, it is established practice in HRAs to consider European sites within the area covered by the plan, and other sites that may be affected beyond this area.

5.7 Bassetlaw District Council has adopted a methodology that uses a 15km area of search to identify European sites that may be affected by plans and projects within Bassetlaw, therefore this distance has been applied in this HRA.

5.8 Although there are no European Sites within Bassetlaw District, four sites have been identified that lie within 15km of the boundary:

. Birklands and Bilhaugh SAC . Hatfield Moor SAC . Thorne Moor SAC . Thorne and Hatfield Moors SPA

5.9 Of these, Hatfield Moor SAC and Thorne and Hatfield Moors SPA lie within 15km of the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Area boundary, both being some 10km away.

5.10 European sites outside the 15km zone may need to be considered in exceptional circumstances and therefore each plan subject to HRA should consider whether there are any pathways by which effects could occur on more distant European sites: Humber Estuary SAC, SPA and Ramsar 5.11 The Humber Estuary SAC, SPA and Ramsar lies north of Walkeringham Neighbourhood Area and has hydrological connectivity via the River Trent that forms the eastern boundary of the Area. However, the SAC and Ramsar are beyond the 15km buffer in which effects are likely, and the SPA is over 25km north. In addition, the River Trent is a main river with several large settlements along it. Therefore, the Neighbourhood Plan is unlikely to result in significant effects upon the Humber Estuary SAC, SPA and Ramsar and they have not been considered further in this HRA. Possible Sherwood Forest pSPA 5.12 Although not formally a pSPA, Natural England has advised that there is a possibility of a Sherwood Forest pSPA being designated in the future on account of supporting populations of breeding nightjar and woodlark. In a note to Local Planning Authorities dated March 2014, Natural England advocates a precautionary approach to any plans or projects which could affect such a site. No formal assessments of the boundary of any future SPA have been made; therefore, it is not possible to definitively identify whether individual sites would fall inside or outside any possible future designated area. However, the Natural England note encloses a map which highlights the areas of greatest ornithological interest for breeding nightjar and woodlark. The Walkeringham Neighbourhood Area boundary lies more than 15km away from these areas. Therefore, it is not considered the Neighbourhood Plan could result in likely significant effects upon the possible Sherwood Forest pSPA and it has not been considered further in this HRA.

5.13 The locations of the European sites are shown on the previous page. Ecological attributes of the European sites 5.14 The attributes that contribute to and define the integrity of the two European sites considered in this HRA have been described in Appendix 2. Such attributes were identified using the Conservation Objectives for each site, Standard Data Forms for SACs and SPAs, as well as Natural England’s Site Improvement Plans (SIPs). This information is used to inform the assessment of how the potential impacts of the Neighbourhood Plan may affect the integrity of each site. Assessment of ‘likely significant effects’ of the Neighbourhood Plan 5.15 As required under Regulation 105 of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (the ‘Habitats Regulations’), an assessment has been undertaken of the ‘likely significant effects’ of the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan. A risk-based approach involving the application of the precautionary principle has been adopted in the assessment, such that a conclusion of ‘no significant effect’ has only been reached where it is considered very unlikely, based on current knowledge and the information available, that

a proposal in the Neighbourhood Plan would have a significant effect on the integrity of a European site.

5.16 A screening matrix has been prepared (Appendix 3), which considers the potential for likely significant effects resulting from each policy in the Draft Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan. A ‘traffic light‘ approach has been used in the screening matrix to record the likely effects of the policies and site allocations on European sites and their qualifying habitats and species, using the colour categories shown below.

Red There are likely to be significant effects (Appropriate Assessment required). Amber There may be significant effects, but this is currently uncertain (Appropriate Assessment required). Green There are unlikely to be significant effects (Appropriate Assessment not required). Interpretation of ‘likely significant effect’ 5.17 Relevant case law helps to interpret when effects should be considered as a likely significant effect, when carrying out HRA of a land use plan.

5.18 In the Waddenzee case, the European Court of Justice ruled on the interpretation of Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive (translated into Reg. 105 in the Habitats Regulations), including that:

. An effect should be considered ‘likely’, “if it cannot be excluded, on the basis of objective information, that it will have a significant effect on the site” (para 44); . An effect should be considered ‘significant’, “if it undermines the conservation objectives” (para 48); and . Where a plan or project has an effect on a site “but is not likely to undermine its conservation objectives, it cannot be considered likely to have a significant effect on the site concerned” (para 47).

5.19 A relevant opinion delivered to the Court of Justice of the European Union commented that:

The requirement that an effect in question be ‘significant’ exists in order to lay down a de minimis threshold. Plans or projects that have no appreciable effect on the site are thereby excluded. If all plans or projects capable of having any effect whatsoever on the site were to be caught by Article 6(3), activities on or near the site would risk being impossible by reason of legislative overkill.

5.20 This opinion (the ‘Sweetman’ case) therefore allows for the authorisation of plans and projects whose possible effects, alone or in combination, can be considered ‘trivial’ or de minimis; referring to such cases as those “that have no appreciable effect on the site”. In practice such effects could be screened out as having no likely significant effect; they would be ‘insignificant’. Assessment 5.21 A detailed Screening matrix is presented in Appendix 3, and the findings are described below in relation to each type of potential impact that the Local Plan could give rise to.

Physical damage/loss of habitat 5.22 Any development resulting from the Neighbourhood Plan will be located within Walkeringham Neighbourhood Area. Loss of habitat from within the boundaries of a European site can be ruled out as there are no European sites within the Neighbourhood Area.

5.23 Loss of habitat from outside the boundaries of a European site could still result in likely significant effects if that habitat supports qualifying species from within the European sites, for example habitat that is used for foraging by birds. However, the European sites lying beyond the boundary of Walkeringham Neighbourhood Area have no notable ecological connectivity and are of a distance that loss or damage to habitat within the area is unlikely to impact upon them. In particular, Hatfield and Thorne SPA is sensitive to impacts of damage or loss of off-site habitat due to its qualifying feature being nightjar, a mobile bird species which will forage within off-site habitat. However, the European sites are over 10km from the Neighbourhood Plan’s development allocations and with intervening infrastructure too, it would not be expected for birds to be dependent on the habitat within the allocations. Furthermore, the area of land to be lost to development is less than 6 hectares in total, representing 0.2-0.4% of the area of each of the European sites.

5.24 Likely significant effects on all European sites can be screened out in relation to physical damage or loss of off-site habitat. Non-physical disturbance (noise, vibration and light) 5.25 Noise and vibration effects, e.g. during the construction of new housing or employment development, are most likely to disturb bird species and are thus a key consideration with respect to European sites where birds are the qualifying features, although such effects may also impact upon some mammals and fish species. Artificial lighting at night (e.g. from street lamps, flood lighting and security lights) is most likely to affect bat populations and other nocturnal animals, and therefore have an adverse effect on the integrity of European sites where bats or nocturnal animals are a qualifying feature.

5.26 It has been assumed that the effects of noise, vibration and light pollution are most likely to cause an adverse effect if development takes place within 500m of a European site with qualifying features sensitive to these disturbances, or known off-site breeding, foraging or roosting areas.

5.27 The European sites lie outside of the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Area boundary and are all well over 500m from new development allocations, therefore likely significant effects as a result of non-physical disturbance are not expected to occur. Air pollution 5.28 Air pollution is most likely to affect European sites where plant, soil and water habitats are the qualifying features, but some qualifying animal species may also be affected, either directly or indirectly, by any deterioration in habitat as a result of air pollution. Deposition of pollutants to the ground and vegetation can alter the characteristics of the soil, affecting the pH and nitrogen availability that can then affect plant health, productivity and species composition.

5.29 In terms of vehicle traffic, nitrogen oxides (NOx, i.e. NO and NO2) are considered to be the key pollutants. Subsequent deposition of nitrogen compounds may lead to both soil and freshwater acidification, and eutrophication of soils and water.

5.30 Based on the Highways Agency Design Manual for Road and Bridges (DMRB) Volume 11, Section 3, Part 1 (which was produced to provide advice regarding the design, assessment and operation of trunk roads (including motorways)), it is assumed that air pollution from roads is unlikely to be significant beyond 200m from the road itself.

5.31 Based on the DMRB guidance, affected roads which should be assessed are those where:

. Daily traffic flows will change by 1,000 AADT (Annual Average Daily Traffic) or more; or . Heavy duty vehicle (HDV) flows will change by 200 AADT or more; or . Daily average speed will change by 10 km/hr or more; or . Peak hour speed will change by 20 km/hr or more; or . Road alignment will change by 5 m or more.

5.32 It has been assumed that only those roads forming part of the primary road network (motorways and primary ‘A’ roads) are likely to experience any significant increases in vehicle traffic as a result of development (i.e. greater than 1,000 AADT). As such, where a site is within 200m of only minor roads, no significant effect from traffic-related air pollution is considered to be the likely outcome.

5.33 All European sites lie outside of the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Area boundary and are located over 200m from the primary road network. They have therefore been screened out in relation to air pollution. Impacts of recreation 5.34 Recreational activities can result in likely significant effects on European sites as a result of erosion, trampling and nutrient enrichment of habitats, and disturbance of species resulting in a compromised ability to breed or survive. Where Local Plan policies are likely to result in an increase in the local population, or where an increase in visitor numbers to the European site is considered likely, there may be potential for associated recreational impacts.

5.35 A well-established approach to avoiding recreational pressures has been developed as part of planning decisions which involve the Thames Basin Heaths SPA (TBH SPA). The TBH SPA, located in southern England, is designated for ground nesting heathland birds including nightjar. The TBH Delivery Framework – which is endorsed by Natural England, and which was scrutinised for robustness and appropriateness by the Technical Assessor of the South East Plan – suggests that at distances between 400m and 5 km, residential housing is likely to result in significant effects associated with recreation and other urban edge effects such as cat predation. Beyond this distance, the Assessor recommended that larger developments (above 50 dwellings) between 5 and 7 km from the SPA be assessed and may be required to provide appropriate mitigation.

5.36 Beyond 7km the effect of recreational pressures on a heathland and woodland site are likely to be minimal. And this distance is reduced to 5km for smaller developments of below 50 dwellings.

5.37 The European sites assessed in this screening are over 10km from Walkeringham Neighbourhood Area boundary and therefore do not need further consideration.

Cat predation 5.38 Cat predation due to an increase in residential populations and cat ownership can result in likely significant effects on European sites where ground nesting bird species are the qualifying features. Nightjar are ground nesting species, and therefore these birds and their nests are vulnerable to predation by domestic cats.

5.39 As described above, the increased risk of cat predation associated with residential schemes in relation to the TBH SPA resulted in the adoption of a 400m development exclusion zone, together with pressure associated with recreational access. NE specifies that at distances of less than 400m avoidance measures are likely to be ineffective at reducing the risks associated with predation.

5.40 The European sites assessed in this screening are over 10km from Walkeringham Neighbourhood Area boundary and therefore do not need further consideration. Water quantity and quality 5.41 An increase in demand for water abstraction and treatment resulting from the growth proposed in the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan could result in changes in hydrology at European sites, specifically a decrease in water quality or changes to water levels. Depending on the qualifying features and particular vulnerabilities of the European sites, this could lead to likely significant effects on the sites qualifying features.

5.42 All of the European sites included within this HRA are outside the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Area. They are not hydrologically connected to the Neighbourhood Area and can therefore be screened out given the lack of impact pathways.

5.43 Likely significant effects associated with changes in water quality and quantity can be screened out in relation to all European sites included in this HRA. Identification of other plans and projects which may have ‘incombination’ effects 5.44 Regulation 105 of the Amended Habitats Regulations 2017 requires an Appropriate Assessment where “a land use plan is likely to have a significant effect on a European site (either alone or in combination with other plans or projects) and is not directly connected with or necessary to the management of the site”. Therefore, it is necessary to consider whether there may be significant effects from the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan in combination with other plans or projects.

5.45 The first stage in identifying ‘in-combination’ effects involves identifying which other plans and projects in addition to the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan may affect the European sites that were the focus of this assessment. There are a large number of potentially relevant plans and projects which could be considered; therefore, the review focused on planned spatial growth within Bassetlaw District.

5.46 The Habitats Regulations Assessment of the Bassetlaw Local Plan (January 2019) concluded that the Local Plan does not result in likely significant effects upon Hatfield Moor SAC or Thorne and Hatfield Moors SPA either alone or in combination. The scale of development planned by the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan is in conformity with the Bassetlaw Local Plan.

6. Conclusions Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) 6.1 The Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan has been prepared for town and country planning purposes and sets a framework for future development consent. The policies of the Neighbourhood Plan determine the use of small areas at local level commensurate with their status in determining local planning applications. As previously outlined, this report details a re-screening of the plan, subsequent to a number of amendments.

6.2 Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan Policy 6 encourages the sustainable and sensitive development of employment sites in the plan area. This has the potential to include the former Walkeringham Brickworks site in Brickyard Lane, adjacent to the Chesterfield Canal SSSI, albeit not specifically allocated following revisions to the plan. That said, specific stipulations within Policy 6 could minimise or prevent any possible negative impacts on biodiversity. Equally, Policy 6 includes stipulations that could minimise or prevent impacts on cultural heritage, whether at the brickworks site or elsewhere in the plan area. The content of the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan is therefore now screened out for the requirement for a Strategic Environmental Assessment in line with Directive 2001/42/EC. Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) 6.3 This revised HRA Screening report indicates that the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan is not predicted to have any likely significant effect on any European site, either alone or in combination with other plans and projects and can therefore be screened out from further assessment.

6.4 This revised HRA Screening report indicates that the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan is not predicted to have any likely significant effect on any European site, either alone or in combination with other plans and projects and can therefore be screened out from further assessment. Consultation 6.5 The environmental consultation bodies (Historic England, Natural England and the Environment Agency) have been consulted during the preparation of this revised Screening Assessment. Their responses are summarised below:

• Historic England – On the basis of the information supplied and in the context of the criteria set out in Schedule 1 of the Environmental Assessment Regulations, Historic England is of the view that the preparation of a SEA is not likely to be required. • Environment Agency – Concurs with the conclusions of the screening report; a full SEA is not required. • Natural England – Agrees that Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan is screened out and that a full SEA is not required, and that a HRA is not required as the proposals are unlikely to have any significant effect upon European designated sites.

6.6 A full copy of the responses received are attached as Appendix 5.

Overall 6.7 Following consideration of the anticipated scope of Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan, the relevant environmental issues locally, and following consultation with Historic England, the Environment Agency, and Natural England, it is concluded that the potential for significant effects to arise as a result of the Plan is unlikely. Consequently, it is considered that a formal SEA is not required.

6.8 It is also concluded that the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan would not be likely to have significant effects on European sites either alone or in-combination with any other plan or project and therefore Appropriate Assessment (Stage 2 of the Habitat Regulation Assessment process) is not required.

6.9 Please note this determination is based upon the draft Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan circulated after the Regulation 14 consultation when Policy 6 was amended to remove specific allocation of the Walkeringham Brickwork site. The Council reserves the right, pending future iterations of the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan, to undertake further screening determinations.

Appendix 1: Assessment of potential environmental effects The following table presents the environmental effects which have the potential to arise because of the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan. This is accompanied by a commentary on whether these effects are likely to be significant. The environmental effects have been grouped by the SEA ‘topics’ suggested by Annex I(f) of the SEA Directive.

SEA Topic Likely Description of effect Effect likely to be significant in the context of SEA? effect? Y/N Biodiversity, flora and fauna Y Without mitigation and No Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) or Special Protection (Including biodiversity enhancement measures, the Areas (SPAs) are present within the Neighbourhood Area. The habitats and species, Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan only SSSI is the Chesterfield Canal which supports a nationally biodiversity sites, areas of has the potential to lead to effects uncommon aquatic plant community characteristic of the geological interest) on biodiversity, including through brackish, eutrophic (nutrient-rich) water. There are four local loss of habitat, disturbance, effects wildlife sites within the Neighbourhood Area (including the River on ecological connections and Trent). indirect effects such as from The Neighbourhood Plan polices are not predicted to have a impacts on water quality and likely significant effect on the SAC or SPA, either alone or in quantity. combination with other plans and projects. Although the former Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan Walkeringham Brickworks site adjoining the Chesterfield Canal Policy 2 aims to protect the natural SSI could be redeveloped under Policy 6, stipulations in the policy environment and landscape could minimise or prevent any possible negative impacts on character of the area. biodiversity. Therefore, effects are unlikely to be significant in Neighbourhood Plan Policy 6 the context of the SEA Directive. encourages the sustainable and sensitive development of employment sites in the plan area. This has the potential to include the former Walkeringham Brickworks site in Brickyard Lane, albeit not specifically allocated following revisions made to the plan. The

SEA Topic Likely Description of effect Effect likely to be significant in the context of SEA? effect? Y/N Brickworks site lies within a SSSI Impact Risk Zone (adjacent to the Chersterfield Canal) requiring consultation with Natural England on large non-residential developments outside existing settlements/urban areas where net additional gross internal floorspace is > 1,000m² or footprint exceeds 0.2ha. The brickworks site measures some 7ha. That said, specific stipulations within Policy 6 could minimise or prevent any possible negative impacts on biodiversity. Policies 8-15 concern the residential development of 9 sites for a total of 66 dwellings. This followed a site assessment process where sites were scored against criterion using a traffic light system, with green indicating no conflicts, amber indicating some or minor issues (that can be overcome) and red indicating direct conflict. There were no sites with formal designations such as Local Wildlife Site or Sites or Special Scientific Interest. None of the allocated sites, individually or collectively, were within a SSSI Impact Risk Zone

SEA Topic Likely Description of effect Effect likely to be significant in the context of SEA? effect? Y/N requiring consultation with Natural England for the scale of development proposed. Population Y The Walkeringham Neighbourhood Whilst the benefits for residents of Walkeringham Parish from a (Including residents’ Plan has the potential to have a well-designed neighbourhood plan have the potential to be wide- quality of life, accessibility to range of benefits for the quality of ranging, these are not significant in the context of the SEA services and facilities, life of residents and for accessibility Directive. deprivation and similar) to services, facilities and opportunities. The 2011 Census recorded 507 households and a population of 1020. Walkeringham parish has a higher proportion of people over 65 and fewer children compared to the national average. The Neighbourhood Plan Policy 4 aims to ensure that future housing growth provides a mix of house types, particularly smaller dwellings, to meet local as well as wider needs. Policy 7 seeks to improve the provision of community services and facilities. Human Health Y The Walkeringham Neighbourhood Whilst the health and wellbeing benefits for residents of the (Incorporating residents’ Plan has the potential to have a Neighbourhood Area from a well-designed neighbourhood plan health and wellbeing) range of benefits for residents’ have the potential to be wide-ranging, these are not significant in health and wellbeing through the context of the SEA Directive. promoting healthier lifestyles and Likely effects from noise quality are also not significant. supporting accessibility to services

SEA Topic Likely Description of effect Effect likely to be significant in the context of SEA? effect? Y/N and facilities. Policies include those that that support the protection of local green spaces (Policy 5) and the provision of improved community services and facilities (Policy 7). Soil Y The Neighbourhood Area’s soilscape Due to the relatively limited area of land likely to be developed (Including agricultural land, is dominated by slightly acid loamy through the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan, effects on the soil erosion, soil quality) and clayey soils with impeded soils resource are unlikely to be significant. drainage. The east of the area contains loamy and clayey floodplain/ coastal flats soils with naturally high groundwater. The Neighbourhood Area is predominantly Agricultural Land Grade 3 with areas of Grade 1 along the banks of the River Trent and Grade 2 in the north-west of the parish. Policies 8-15 concern the residential development of 10 sites for a total of 66 dwellings. None of the allocated housing sites involve the loss of Grade 1 or 2 agricultural land but It is uncertain whether they will be sited on land classified as the Best and Most Versatile Agricultural Land as recent, detailed agricultural land classification has not taken place. Nonetheless, the total area of

SEA Topic Likely Description of effect Effect likely to be significant in the context of SEA? effect? Y/N the proposed housing sites is some 4.15 hectares. Policy 1 seeks to limit development outside of the Walkeringham Development Boundary. Water Y The Walkeringham Neighbourhood Potential effects on water availability will be limited by the (Including water quality and Plan has the potential to lead to a relatively small-scale of proposals likely to be facilitated by the availability) very small-scale increase in water Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan. Effects unlikely to be demand in the Neighbourhood Area significant. through supporting the delivery of 9 sites for a total of 66 dwellings. Air Y Bassetlaw District Council currently No existing air quality issues exist and there are no Air Quality (Including air quality) has no Air Quality Management Management Areas within the Neighbourhood Area. Any effects Areas. on air quality are not significant in the context of the SEA Neighbourhood Plan Policy 6 Directive. encourages the sustainable and sensitive development of businesses in the plan area. Policies 8-15 concern the residential development of 9 sites for a total of 66 dwellings. These policies would not be expected to cause a significant increase in traffic in the area and therefore air pollution. Climatic Factors Y In terms of climate change Due to the small scale, local scope of the Walkeringham (Including relating to climate mitigation, the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan, the nature and magnitude of effects change mitigation (limiting Neighbourhood Plan actively seeks directly arising as a result of the Walkeringham Neighbourhood greenhouse gas emissions) to locate new housing development Plan are unlikely to be significant in the context of the SEA and adaptation (adapting to within or adjoining the existing Directive.

SEA Topic Likely Description of effect Effect likely to be significant in the context of SEA? effect? Y/N the anticipated effects of village, where the majority of the climate change, including local services and facilities are flood risk) located. This will help limit potential increases in greenhouse gas emissions from an increase in the built footprint of the Neighbourhood Area. The River Trent has been the major source of flooding in the Neighbourhood Area in the past. Due to the topography (a shallow basin where the village sits) and the geology (much of the land is underlain by clay so the ground is relatively impermeable), the village is highly affected by surface water flooding. Policies 8-15 concern the residential development of 9 sites for a total of 66 dwellings. None of the allocated housing sites involve the development in Flood Risk Zones 2 or 3. Material Assets Y The Walkeringham Neighbourhood Potential increases in waste as a direct result of the (Including minerals Plan may lead to small increases in Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan will be managed through resources, waste the Neighbourhood Area’s waste statutory requirements regarding waste management. Due to considerations) management requirements through their limited magnitude, effects are unlikely to be significant in supporting the delivery of new the context of the SEA Directive. housing. No mineral sites or resources are likely to be affected as

SEA Topic Likely Description of effect Effect likely to be significant in the context of SEA? effect? Y/N a result of the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan. Cultural Heritage Y Development undertaken in Designated Heritage Assets: there are no World Heritage Sites, (Including historic accordance with the policies of the Historic Parks and Gardens, or Conservation Areas in the environment, cultural Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan Neighbourhood Area. There is a Scheduled Monuments- the heritage, historic settings) has the potential to have effects on standing cross on Walkeringham village green. There are nine the fabric and setting of historic buildings and structures in Walkeringham Parish listed by Historic environment assets. These include England for their special architectural or historic interest. They designated and non-designated include the Grade I Church of St Mary Magdalene, Walkeringham. heritage assets. There are no Grade II* listed buildings and the remainder are Neighbourhood Plan Policy 3 designated as Grade II listings. requires development to There are a number of non-designated heritage assets which demonstrate a high design quality need to be considered. that will contribute to the character No designated heritage sites are affected by the Neighbourhood of the village. Particular reference is Plan’s proposals. In the context of the SEA Screening Directive made to the Walkeringham while Policy 6 could potentially allow the Walkeringham Character Study and Design Guide Brickworks non-designated heritage asset to be reused and form 2018. part of a scheme, it is not clear from the information available Neighbourhood Plan Policy 6 whether there are any site remediation costs that may raise encourages the sustainable and viability issues and require a comprehensive redevelopment of sensitive development of the whole site with the loss of any non-designated heritage employment sites in the plan area, assets. which could include the former The Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan seeks to ensure that all Walkeringham Brickworks site. The new development would reflect the distinctive character of brickworks site measures some 7ha. Walkeringham, including local character and distinctiveness. The former brickyard buildings are a The likelihood of significant effects on the listed buildings present non-designated heritage asset and in the parish is also likely to be limited by the Walkeringham the brick chimney is still in place, Neighbourhood Plan’s focus on the protection of its historic occupying a prominent position. character and local heritage assets. There is also the statutory

SEA Topic Likely Description of effect Effect likely to be significant in the context of SEA? effect? Y/N Policies 8-15 concern the residential protection of designated heritage assets that will run alongside development of 9 sites for a total of any neighbourhood plan policy. 66 dwellings. This followed a site Therefore, effects are unlikely to be significant in the context of assessment process where sites the SEA Directive. were scored against criterion using a traffic light system, with green indicating no conflicts, amber indicating some or minor issues (that can be overcome) and red indicating direct conflict. None of the allocated housing sites have an impact upon identified heritage assets. Landscape Y Direct effects from the In terms of landscape quality, no ‘sensitive areas’ as defined by (Including landscape Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan the NPPG are present in the Neighbourhood Area. and townscape on landscape and townscape Furthermore, the likelihood of significant effects on the integrity quality) character have the potential to take of the landscape and townscape are likely to be limited by the place. Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan’s focus on protecting its Neighbourhood Plan Policy 2 landscape and heritage assets and the guidance set out in its requires new development to supporting Character Study and Design Guide. contribute to the distinctive Overall, the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan’s focus on character of the area. protecting and enhancing the landscape/townscape of the Policies 8-15 concern the residential Neighbourhood Area and protecting key features of importance development of 9 sites for a total of for the historic environment will deliver positive effects on 66 dwellings. This followed a site landscape and townscape quality and facilitate enhancements. assessment process where sites Therefore, potential effects on landscape character and were scored against criterion using townscape quality are unlikely to be significant in the context of a traffic light system, with green the SEA Directive. indicating no conflicts, amber indicating some or minor issues

SEA Topic Likely Description of effect Effect likely to be significant in the context of SEA? effect? Y/N (that can be overcome) and red indicating direct conflict. The Bassetlaw Landscape Character Assessment provides a study of the District in terms of landscape condition and sensitivity, identifying Policy Zones (based on recommended landscape actions). Policy Zones where landscape needs to be conserved are the most sensitive to the potential impacts of new development, whereas areas that need new landscape character creating are least sensitive (and may benefit from appropriately designed schemes that could introduce new or enhanced landscape character features. In Walkeringham there are three policy zones (shown on the map below): Idle Lowlands 01 – Conserve Mid Notts Farmlands MN02 – Create Trent Washlands – Conserve All housing sites allocated in the Neighbourhood Plan lie within the Mid Notts Farmlands where actions that create new features or areas where existing elements are lost or are in poor condition are supported.

Appendix 2: Ecological attributes of the European sites

Hatfield Moor Special Area of Conservation Description Hatfield Moors, which covers an area of 1363.55 hectares, is a remnant of an extensive lowland raised bog which once occupied the Humberhead levels. Hatfield is unique in having developed directly upon nutrient deficient gravels without an initial reed-swamp phase. Much of the bog has been cut for peat yet a restricted representative flora and fauna persists within a mosaic of mire and dry heath habitats beneath birch scrub. The mire communities are dominated by cottongrasses Eriophorum vaginatum and E. angustifolium, cross-leaved heath Erica tetralix and bogmosses Sphagnum spp., but include locally rare species such as cranberry Vaccinium oxycoccus, bog myrtle Myrica gale and bog rosemary Andromeda polifolia. Area 1359.45ha Qualifying Features H7120 Degraded raised bogs still capable of natural regeneration Site status* 92.23% in unfavourable (recovering) condition 6.50% in unfavourable (no change) condition 1.27% in favourable condition Special Area of Conservation objectives Ensure that the integrity of the site is maintained or restored as appropriate, and ensure that the site contributes to achieving the Favourable Conservation Status of its Qualifying Features, by maintaining or restoring: The extent and distribution of qualifying natural habitats The structure and function (including typical species) of the qualifying natural habitat, and The supporting processes on which the qualifying natural habitat rely. Site Improvement Plan: pressures, threats and related development The main pressures and threats to this site include drainage, inappropriate scrub control, impacts of atmospheric nitrogen deposition, public access/disturbance, peat extraction and invasive species. Additionally, planning permission is a problem in that wind farms have been erected or are planned in the wider area surrounding the SAC, yet investigation is needed to better understand the cumulative impact of existing and planned wind farm and other local developments on the nightjar population. *Site status is an assessment by Natural England of the status of the SSSIs within the SAC

Thorne and Hatfield Moors Special Protection Area Description Covering an approximate area of 2449.2 hectares, Thorne and Hatfield Moors SPA is an extensive lowland raised mire system adjacent to the Humber estuary on the north-east coast of England and is the largest remaining lowland peatland in England. Despite a long history of extensive peat extraction since the late nineteenth century, the site retains substantial areas of Sphagnum bog, which has been changed by succession to wet scrub woodland dominated by Birch Betula sp., sallows and Alder Alnus glutinosa. Where the peat surface has been removed, subsequent restoration of active bog has depended upon shallow flooding to allow Sphagnum and other bog plants to re-colonise. The mire communities are dominated by Hare’s-tail Eriophorum vaginatum and Common Cottongrass E. augustifolium, Cross-leaved Heath Erica tetralix, Soft-rush Juncus effuses and Sphagnum mosses, and include a variety of scarcer bog plants such as Bog-rosemary Andromeda polifolia and Cranberry Vaccinium oxycoccos. Drier heath is dominated by Heather Calluna vulgaris, Bracken Pteridium aquilinum and Purple Moorgrass Molinia caerulea. Birch Betula sp. scrub, some of it dense, occurs throughout both moors. The diverse mosaic of habitats contribute greatly to the ornithological interest, which comprises breeding species, notably Caprimulgus europaeus. Area 2449.2ha Qualifying Features A224 Caprimulgus europaeus; European nightjar (Breeding) Site status* Hatfield Moor: 92.23% in unfavourable (recovering) condition 6.50% in unfavourable (no change) condition 1.27% in favourable condition Special Area of Conservation objectives Ensure that the integrity of the site is maintained or restored as appropriate, and ensure that the site contributes to achieving the aims of the Wild Birds Directive, by maintaining or restoring: The extent and distribution of the habitats of the qualifying features The structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying features The supporting processes on which the habitats of the qualifying features rely The population of each of the qualifying features, and, The distribution of the qualifying features within the site. Site Improvement Plan: pressures, threats and related development The main pressures and threats to this site include drainage, inappropriate scrub control, impacts of atmospheric nitrogen deposition, public access/disturbance, peat extraction and invasive species. Additionally, planning permission is a problem in that wind farms have been erected or are planned in the wider area surrounding the SAC, yet investigation is needed to better understand the cumulative impact of existing and planned wind farm and other local developments on the nightjar population. *Site status is an assessment by Natural England of the status of the SSSIs within the SAC

Appendix 3: HRA Screening Matrix The screening matrix below shows which types of impacts on European sites could potentially result from each of the policies and sites allocated in the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan. Where a site is not expected to have a particular type of impact, the relevant cell is shaded green. Where a site could potentially have a certain type of impact, this is shown in orange. The final column sets out the screening conclusions.

Policy Likely activities (operation) Likely effects if proposal European site(s) potentially Could the proposal have to result as a consequence implemented affected likely significant effects on of the proposal European sites? Policy 1: Sustainable Residential development Physical loss and damage Hatfield Moor Special Area Physical loss and damage is Development and the Economic development Air pollution of Conservation not possible as the Development Increase in vehicle traffic Disturbance from recreation Thorne and Hatfield Moors European sites do not lie Boundary Increase in recreation Special Protection Area within the Neighbourhood pressure Area. The European sites are over 10km away with intervening infrastructure too. It would not be expected for birds to be dependent on the habitat within the Walkeringham Development Boundary. Given the small number of houses involved, the distance involved, and the intention to focus development on the existing built area of Walkeringham, it is considered unlikely this policy would impact upon the SAC or SPA as a result of increased population and recreation.

Policy Likely activities (operation) Likely effects if proposal European site(s) potentially Could the proposal have to result as a consequence implemented affected likely significant effects on of the proposal European sites? This policy alone would not be expected to cause a significant increase in traffic in the area and therefore air pollution. Policy 2: Protecting the None – this policy sets out n/a n/a No Natural Environment and principles to protect the Landscape Character landscape and countryside from inappropriate development, it will not result in new development. Policy 3: Design Principles None – this policy sets n/a n/a No principles for the design of new development, it will not result in new development. Policy 4: A Mix of Housing None – this policy sets out n/a n/a No Types the requirement to consider an appropriate mix of housing for local people’s needs. It will not itself result in new development. Policy 5: Designation of None – this policy requires n/a n/a No Local Green Spaces new development to protect Local Green Space, it will not itself result in development or an increase traffic or visitor numbers.

Policy Likely activities (operation) Likely effects if proposal European site(s) potentially Could the proposal have to result as a consequence implemented affected likely significant effects on of the proposal European sites? Policy 6: Maintaining Local Employment development Physical loss and damage Hatfield Moor Special Area Physical loss and damage is Employment Increase in vehicle traffic Air pollution of Conservation not possible as the Thorne and Hatfield Moors European sites do not lie Special Protection Area within the Neighbourhood Area. The European sites are over 10km away with intervening infrastructure too. It would not be expected for birds to be dependent on the habitat within the Walkeringham area. This policy alone would not be expected to cause a significant increase in traffic in the area and therefore air pollution. Policy 7: Enhancing the Development of community Physical loss and damage Hatfield Moor Special Area Physical loss and damage is provision of community facilities Air pollution of Conservation not possible as the facilities Increase in vehicle traffic Thorne and Hatfield Moors European sites do not lie Special Protection Area within the Neighbourhood Area. The European sites are over 10km away with intervening infrastructure too. It would not be expected for birds to be dependent on the habitat within the Walkeringham area.

Policy Likely activities (operation) Likely effects if proposal European site(s) potentially Could the proposal have to result as a consequence implemented affected likely significant effects on of the proposal European sites? This policy alone would not be expected to cause a significant increase in traffic in the area and therefore air pollution. Policy 8: Development of Housing development Physical loss and damage Hatfield Moor Special Area Physical loss and damage is NP02 (Land at The Laurels, Increase in vehicle traffic Air pollution of Conservation not possible as the Station Road) 3 dwellings Thorne and Hatfield Moors European sites do not lie 0.34ha Special Protection Area within the Neighbourhood Area. The European sites are over 10km away with intervening infrastructure too. It would not be expected for birds to be dependent on the habitat within the Walkeringham area. This policy alone would not be expected to cause a significant increase in traffic in the area and therefore air pollution. Policy 9: Development of Housing development Physical loss and damage Hatfield Moor Special Area Physical loss and damage is NP07 (Land south of Increase in vehicle traffic Air pollution of Conservation not possible as the Kilmeaden, West Moor Thorne and Hatfield Moors European sites do not lie Road) 3 dwellings 0.17ha Special Protection Area within the Neighbourhood Area. The European sites are over 10km away with intervening infrastructure too. It would not be

Policy Likely activities (operation) Likely effects if proposal European site(s) potentially Could the proposal have to result as a consequence implemented affected likely significant effects on of the proposal European sites? expected for birds to be dependent on the habitat within the Walkeringham area. This policy alone would not be expected to cause a significant increase in traffic in the area and therefore air pollution. Policy 10: Development of Housing development Physical loss and damage Hatfield Moor Special Area Physical loss and damage is NP09 (Land north of Increase in vehicle traffic Air pollution of Conservation not possible as the Fountain Hill Road) 3 Thorne and Hatfield Moors European sites do not lie dwellings 0.13ha Special Protection Area within the Neighbourhood Area. The European sites are over 10km away with intervening infrastructure too. It would not be expected for birds to be dependent on the habitat within the Walkeringham area. This policy alone would not be expected to cause a significant increase in traffic in the area and therefore air pollution. Policy 11: Development of Housing development Physical loss and damage Hatfield Moor Special Area Physical loss and damage is NP13 a & b (Land north and Increase in vehicle traffic Air pollution of Conservation not possible as the south of Fountain Hill Road) Thorne and Hatfield Moors European sites do not lie 6 dwellings 0.45ha Special Protection Area within the Neighbourhood

Policy Likely activities (operation) Likely effects if proposal European site(s) potentially Could the proposal have to result as a consequence implemented affected likely significant effects on of the proposal European sites? Area. The European sites are over 10km away with intervening infrastructure too. It would not be expected for birds to be dependent on the habitat within the Walkeringham area. This policy alone would not be expected to cause a significant increase in traffic in the area and therefore air pollution. Policy 12: Development of Housing development Physical loss and damage Hatfield Moor Special Area Physical loss and damage is NP14 (Land east of Increase in vehicle traffic Air pollution of Conservation not possible as the Stockwith Road) 12 Thorne and Hatfield Moors European sites do not lie dwellings 1.08ha Special Protection Area within the Neighbourhood Area. The European sites are over 10km away with intervening infrastructure too. It would not be expected for birds to be dependent on the habitat within the Walkeringham area. This policy alone would not be expected to cause a significant increase in traffic in the area and therefore air pollution.

Policy Likely activities (operation) Likely effects if proposal European site(s) potentially Could the proposal have to result as a consequence implemented affected likely significant effects on of the proposal European sites? Policy 13: Development of Housing development Physical loss and damage Hatfield Moor Special Area Physical loss and damage is NP23 (Land east of Increase in vehicle traffic Air pollution of Conservation not possible as the Brickenhole Lane) 12 Thorne and Hatfield Moors European sites do not lie dwellings 0.39ha Special Protection Area within the Neighbourhood Area. The European sites are over 10km away with intervening infrastructure too. It would not be expected for birds to be dependent on the habitat within the Walkeringham area. This policy alone would not be expected to cause a significant increase in traffic in the area and therefore air pollution. Policy 14: Development of Housing development Physical loss and damage Hatfield Moor Special Area Physical loss and damage is NP24 (Land west of High Increase in vehicle traffic Air pollution of Conservation not possible as the Street) 12 dwellings 1.67ha Thorne and Hatfield Moors European sites do not lie Special Protection Area within the Neighbourhood Area. The European sites are over 10km away with intervening infrastructure too. It would not be expected for birds to be dependent on the habitat within the Walkeringham area.

Policy Likely activities (operation) Likely effects if proposal European site(s) potentially Could the proposal have to result as a consequence implemented affected likely significant effects on of the proposal European sites? This policy alone would not be expected to cause a significant increase in traffic in the area and therefore air pollution. Policy 15: Development of Housing development Physical loss and damage Hatfield Moor Special Area Physical loss and damage is NP26 (Land adjacent to Increase in vehicle traffic Air pollution of Conservation not possible as the South Moor Lodge, south of Thorne and Hatfield Moors European sites do not lie South Moor Road and west Special Protection Area within the Neighbourhood of Brickenhole Lane) 15 Area. The European sites are dwellings 1.24ha over 10km away with intervening infrastructure too. It would not be expected for birds to be dependent on the habitat within the Walkeringham area. This policy alone would not be expected to cause a significant increase in traffic in the area and therefore air pollution.

Appendix 4: Annex I and Annex II Projects, EIA Directive

Annex I Projects, EIA Directive All projects listed in Annex I are considered as having significant effects on the environment and require an Environmental Impact Assessment. The listed projects are summarised as follows:

1. Crude oil refineries, coal or shale gasification liquefaction installations 2. Thermal power stations, nuclear power stations, other nuclear reactors etc 3. Installations for the processing, reprocessing, final disposal or storage of irradiated nuclear fuel, or the production or enrichment of nuclear fuel 4. Integrated works for the initial smelting of cast-iron and steel, and the production of non- ferrous crude metals from ore 5. Installations for the extraction, processing and transforming of asbestos 6. Integrated chemical installations for the industrial scale manufacture of basic organic and inorganic fertilisers, plant health products and biocides, pharmaceuticals, and explosives 7. Construction of long-distance railway lines. Airports with a basic runway length run of 2,100 metres or more. Construction of motorways and express roads. New roads of four or more lanes and roads which have been improved so as to convert two lanes or fewer to four lanes or more, where such road would be 10 kilometres or more in continuous length 8. Inland waterways and ports for inland-waterway traffic, trading ports and piers 9. Waste disposal installations for the incineration or chemical treatment of hazardous waste 10. Waste disposal installations for the incineration or chemical treatment of non- hazardous waste 11. Groundwater abstraction or artificial groundwater recharge schemes 12. Water transfer schemes between river basins 13. Waste water treatment plants 14. Commercial extraction of petroleum and natural gas 15. Dams and water storage installations 16. Gas, oil or chemical pipelines and pipelines used for the transport of carbon dioxide for geological storage

Annex II Projects, EIA Directive For the projects listed in Annex II the national authorities have to decide whether an Environmental Impact Assessment is needed. The projects listed in Annex II are in general those not included in Annex I but also other types such as urban development projects and flood-relief works. The listed projects are summarised as follows:

1. Agriculture, silviculture and aquaculture a. Projects for the restructuring of rural land holdings; b. Projects for the use of uncultivated land or semi-natural areas for intensive agricultural purposes; c. Water management projects for agriculture, including irrigation and land drainage projects; d. Initial afforestation and deforestation for the purposes of conversion to another type of land use; e. Intensive livestock installations (projects not included in Annex I); f. Intensive fish farming; g. Reclamation of land from the sea. 2. Extractive Industry a. Quarries, open-cast mining and peat extraction (projects not included in Annex I); b. Underground mining; c. Extraction of minerals by marine or fluvial dredging; d. Deep drillings, in particular: (i) geothermal drilling; (ii) drilling for the storage of nuclear waste material; (iii) drilling for water supplies; with the exception of drillings for investigating the stability of the soil; e. Surface industrial installations for the extraction of coal, petroleum, natural gas and ores, as well as bituminous shale. 3. Energy industry a. Industrial installations for the production of electricity, steam and hot water (projects not included in Annex I); b. Industrial installations for carrying gas, steam and hot water; transmission of electrical energy by overhead cables (projects not included in Annex I); c. Surface storage of natural gas; d. Underground storage of combustible gases; e. Surface storage of fossil fuels; f. Industrial briquetting of coal and lignite; g. Installations for the processing and storage of radioactive waste (unless included in Annex I); h. Installations for hydroelectric energy production; i. Installations for the harnessing of power for energy production (wind farms) and j. Installations for the capture of CO2 streams for the purposes of geological storage, pursuant to Directive 2009/31/EC, from installations not covered by Annex I to this Directive. 4. Production and processing of metals a. Installations for the production of pig iron or steel (primary or secondary fusion) including continuous casting; b. Installations for the processing of ferrous metals: (i) hot-rolling mills; (ii) smitheries with hammers; (iii) application of protective fused metal coats; c. Ferrous metal foundries;

d. Installations for the smelting, including the alloyage, of non-ferrous metals, excluding precious metals, including recovered products (refining, foundry casting, etc.); e. Installations for surface treatment of metals and plastic materials using an electrolytic or chemical process; f. Manufacture and assembly of motor vehicles and manufacture of motor-vehicle engines; g. Shipyards; h. Installations for the construction and repair of aircraft; i. Manufacture of railway equipment; j. Swaging by explosives; k. Installations for the roasting and sintering of metallic ores. 5. Mineral industry a. (a) Coke ovens (dry coal distillation); b. (b) Installations for the manufacture of cement; c. Installations for the production of asbestos and the manufacture of asbestos products (projects not included in Annex I); See under corresponding Annex I project category, Annex I (5) above; d. Installations for the manufacture of glass including glass fibre; e. Installations for smelting mineral substances including the production of mineral fibres; f. Manufacture of ceramic products by burning, in particular roofing tiles, bricks, refractory bricks, tiles, stoneware or porcelain. 6. Chemical industry (Projects not included in Annex I) a. Treatment of intermediate products and production of chemicals; b. Production of pesticides and pharmaceutical products, paint and varnishes, elastomers and peroxides; c. Storage facilities for petroleum, petrochemical and chemical products 7. Food industry a. Manufacture of vegetable and animal oils and fats; b. Packing and canning of animal and vegetable products; c. Manufacture of dairy products; d. Brewing and malting; e. Confectionery and syrup manufacture; f. Installations for the slaughter of animals; g. Industrial starch manufacturing installations; h. Fish-meal and fish-oil factories; i. Sugar factories. 8. Textile, leather, wood and paper industries a. Industrial plants for the production of paper and board (projects not included in Annex I); b. Plants for the pre-treatment (operations such as washing, bleaching, mercerisation) or dyeing of fibres or textiles; c. Plants for the tanning of hides and skins; d. Cellulose-processing and production installations. Annex II 9. Rubber Industry Manufacture and treatment of elastomer-based products 10. Infrastructure projects a. Industrial estate development projects b. Urban development projects, including the construction of shopping centres and car parks. c. Construction of railways and intermodal transhipment facilities, and of intermodal terminals (projects not included in Annex I);

d. Construction of airfields (projects not included in Annex I) This project category could be interpreted as including heliports; e. Construction of roads, harbours, and port installations, including fishing harbours (projects not included in Annex I); f. Inland waterway construction not included in Annex I, canalisation and flood relief works; g. Dams and other installations designed to hold water or store it on a long-term basis (projects not included in Annex I); h. Tramways, elevated and underground railways, suspended lines or similar lines of a particular type, used exclusively or mainly for passenger transport; i. Oil and gas pipeline installations and pipelines for the transport of CO2 streams for the purposes of geological storage (projects not included in Annex I); Annex II (10)(f) Annex II (10)(h) 53; j. Installations of long-distance aqueducts; k. Coastal work to combat erosion and maritime works capable of altering the coast through the construction, for example, of dykes, moles, jetties and other sea defence works, excluding the maintenance and reconstruction of such works; l. Groundwater abstraction and artificial groundwater recharge schemes not included in Annex I; m. Works for the transfer of water resources between river basins not included in Annex I. 11. Other projects a. Permanent racing and test tracks for motorised vehicles; b. Installations for the disposal of waste (projects not included in Annex I); c. Wastewater treatment plants (projects not included in Annex I); d. Sludge-deposition sites; The treatment and disposal of sludge could be interpreted as being covered by this project category. e. Storage of scrap iron, including scrap vehicles; f. Test benches for engines, turbines or reactors; g. Installations for the manufacture of artificial mineral fibres; (h) Installations for the recovery or destruction of explosive substances; (i) Knackers’ yards. 12. Tourism and leisure a. Ski runs, ski lifts and cable cars and associated developments; b. Marinas; c. Holiday villages and hotel complexes outside urban areas and associated developments; d. Permanent campsites and caravan sites; 13. a. Any change or extension of projects listed in Annex I or Annex II, already authorised, executed or in the process of being executed, which may have significant adverse effects on the environment; b. Projects in Annex I, undertaken exclusively or mainly for the development and testing of new methods or products and not used for more than two years.

Appendix 5: Consultation Responses

From: Clifford, Eleanor To: Will Wilson Subject: RE: Historic England advice on case PL00562662 Date: 09 October 2019 14:40:33

Good afternoon Will,

Thank you for your email and making us aware of your concerns. In light of your comments and discussion with colleagues, please find below revised comments on the SEA/ HRA Screening.

WALKERINGHAM NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN – REVISED SEA SCREENING REQUEST

Thank you for your consultation on the above, the request for a Screening Opinion in respect of the revised Walkeringham Neighbourood Plan and your recent communication of 8 October 2019. Please find below out revised comments in respect of the SEA Screening request.

For the purposes of consultations on SEA Screening Opinions, Historic England confines its advice to the question, “Is it likely to have a significant effect on the environment?” in respect of our area of concern, cultural heritage. Our comments are based on the information supplied with the screening request.

On the basis of the information supplied and in the context of the criteria set out in Schedule 1 of the Environmental Assessment Regulations [Annex II of ‘SEA’ Directive], Historic England is of the view that the preparation of a Strategic Environmental Assessment is not likely to be required.

The views of the other statutory consultation bodies should be taken into account before the overall decision on the need for a SEA is made. If a decision is made to undertake a SEA, please note that Historic England has published guidance on Sustainability Appraisal / Strategic Environmental Assessment and the Historic Environment that is relevant to both local and neighbourhood planning and available at:

Should it be concluded that, overall, a SEA will be required for the Plan, Historic England would be pleased to discuss the scope of the assessment in relation to the historic environment in due course.

Please do contact me if you have any further questions.

Kind regards,

Eleanor Clifford Business Officer- Midlands Regions Group Historic England, The Axis, 10 Holliday Street, Birmingham, B11TF 0121 625 6888/ 0121 625 6864

Please note that Historic England’s East Midlands and West Midlands offices have merged and our Northampton office is now closed. Our Midlands office is based in Birmingham and contact details can be found on our Midlands Regional Office webpage here.

We are the public body that helps people care for, enjoy and celebrate England's spectacular historic environment, from beaches and battlefields to parks and pie shops. Follow us: Facebook | Twitter | Instagram Sign up to our newsletter

From: Will Wilson [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 08 October 2019 16:49 To: Clifford, Eleanor Subject: RE: Historic England advice on case PL00562662

Dear Eleanor,

Thank you for your email with regard to the consultation on the revised SEA / HRA Screening for the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan.

I have now received responses from all consultees and am in the process of reviewing them. Both Natural England and the Environment Agency have responded that they agree with our verdict that the plan be screened-out for both SEA and HRA. Historic England’s verdict that an SEA is advisable is respected, however the consultant working for the Walkeringham Steering Group has asked me to seek extra clarification.

The query is that, whilst your most recent response directs attention to the initial letter issued in April, that letter addresses the allocation in the plan of the former Walkeringham Brickworks site. The re-screened version of the plan has seen this allocation removed, and the incorporation of new protections into the accompanying policy. In addition to the above, a recent planning application for the Brickworks site has yielded consultee comments from our own Conservation team; please find a copy attached. The comments potentially shed more light onto the nature of this site and its non-designated heritage assets.

Whilst we would be happy to follow the advice already offered, we feel that two points outlined here may have significance. To this effect, and in the interests of role in providing advice to the neighbourhood plan group, your consideration would be appreciated.

Kind regards, Will

Will Wilson, BSc MA PhD AssocRTPI Interim Lead Neighbourhood Planner

(01909) 533 495

-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] Sent: 04 September 2019 15:17 To: Will Wilson Subject: Historic England advice on case PL00562662

Dear Mr Wilson

I am writing in relation to the following:

SEA/SA/IIA: Strategic Environmental Assessment/ Sustainability Appraisal/ Integrated Impact Assessment WALKERINGHAM NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN , STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND HABITATS, BASSETLAW, NOTTINGHAMSHIRE [Case Ref. PL00562662; HE File Ref. HD/P5345; Your Reference. Walkeringham SEA_HRA]

Thank you for contacting us again. We have no further comments to add at this time and I refer you to our previous comments made on 24/04/2019.

Many thanks.

Yours Sincerely

Eleanor Clifford on behalf of Clive Fletcher Business Officer E-mail: [email protected] Direct Dial: 0121 625 6864

We help people understand, enjoy and value the historic environment, and protect it for the future. Historic England is a public body, and we champion everyone’s heritage, across England.

This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of Historic England unless specifically stated. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system and notify the sender immediately. Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it. Any information sent to Historic England may become publicly available. Please read our full privacy policy (https://www.historicengland.org.uk/terms/privacy-cookies/) for more information. ______[Bassetlaw District Council] Will Wilson Interim Lead Neighbourhood Planner Bassetlaw District Council Queens Buildings, Potter Street, Worksop, Nottinghamshire, S80 2AH W: www.bassetlaw.gov.uk ______This email is only for the use of the addressee. It may contain information which is legally privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient you must not copy, distribute or disseminate this email or any enclosure to anyone other than the addressee. If you receive this communication in error please delete it

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd on behalf of Bassetlaw District Council. From: Millbank, Rob To: Will Wilson Subject: RE: Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan: Strategic Environmental Assessment and Habitats Regulations Assessment Screening Date: 06 September 2019 15:45:55

Hi Will,

Thank you for your email. Apologies for the slight delay in taking a look at this for you. I can confirm that we agree with the conclusion of the SEA screening report, i.e. that the plan is unlikely to cause significant environmental impacts. We are comfortable with the conclusion that a full SEA will not therefore be required.

Kind regards,

Rob

Rob Millbank Planning Specialist, Sustainable Places Team Environment Agency | Trentside Office, Scarrington Road, Nottingham NG2 5FA [email protected] External: 020 3025 5036 | 07500 761448

From: Will Wilson [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 27 August 2019 14:33 To: SM-NE-Consultations (NE) ; [email protected]; Drewry, Joe ; Millbank, Rob Subject: Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan: Strategic Environmental Assessment and Habitats Regulations Assessment Screening

Dear Consultee,

Thank you for your previous contributions in respect to the assessment of the emerging Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan against the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) and Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) regulations. Further to the publication of the SEA / HRA Screening report in May of this year, the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan has now been amended (currently in draft form, awaiting submission in accordance with regulation 16, as per the attached). The updates include changes to policies that have a bearing on the previous assessment, specifically Policy 6 - Maintaining Local Employment. Further to discussions with Walkeringham Parish Council, Bassetlaw District Council have undertaken an updated SEA / HRA screening assessment of the plan; the revised draft screening report and updated version of the Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan are attached. For clarity, the impact of the changes on the screening assessment are detailed in the introduction to the report.

In order to comply with the statutory requirements, the screening report is provided to the environmental bodies (Historic England, the Environment Agency and Natural England) for their opinion. I would be grateful for your feedback on the Draft SEA/HRA Screening Report by Tuesday, 1 October 2019 (i.e. five weeks from today).

Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Date: 01 October 2019 Our ref: 293266

Will Wilson Planning Policy Officer (Neighbourhood Plans) Hornbeam House Crewe Business Park BY EMAIL ONLY Electra Way Crewe Cheshire CW1 6GJ

T 0300 060 3900

Dear Will

Planning consultation: Walkeringham Neighbourhood Plan - SEA AND HAB REGS SCREENING - FURTHER INFO

Thank you for your consultation on the above dated 27/08/2019

Natural England is a non-departmental public body. Our statutory purpose is to ensure that the natural environment is conserved, enhanced, and managed for the benefit of present and future generations, thereby contributing to sustainable development.

Strategic Environmental Assessment Screening

We welcome the production of this SEA Screening report. Natural England notes and concurs with the screening outcome i.e. that no SEA is required.

Further guidance on deciding whether the proposals are likely to have significant environmental effects and the requirements for consulting Natural England on SEA are set out in the National Planning Practice Guidance.

Habitats Regulations Assessment Screening

Natural England notes the screening process applied to this Neighbourhood plan. We agree with the Council’s conclusion of no likely significant effect upon European designated sites.

For any queries relating to the specific advice in this letter only please contact me on 02082 256387. For any new consultations, or to provide further information on this consultation please send your correspondences to [email protected].

Yours sincerely

Felicity Bingham Area Delivery East Midlands Area Team [email protected] Tel: 02082 25638